Michael Koshkin is an affable and congenial bloke. After stepping off of the plane from Denver, the first thing he did was head to Poison Girl, where he just missed the first reading of the Poison Pen Series (indeed co-curated by Casey Fleming and some guy named Scott). Johnny will have to thank Michael for teaching me how to pronounce his last name correctly. I had pronounced it up until today [sack-kiss] when it's actually closer to [seuk-is]. There was also many complaints about not being able to find any books by Flarfists in Houston, or even The Collected Poems of Ted Berrigan, for that matter.
The discussion veered toward the question of why Houston poets seem to be so isolated, something that Matt Siegel and I were also exploring (Matt, Michael, you missed each other by 10 minutes)(Matt's answer: "Well, let's change that!" Yes, that's the spirit, Matt). My hypothesis stemmed from the Creative Writing Program's #2 rank in US News & Reports. It made the poets attending the program somewhat complacent, unwilling to answer anyone except their peers there (and the poets at the Iowa's Writers Workshop). Sure, why not? But this doesn't work quite well for the Helios people and the Panhandler Quarterly people (which is really the same scene)(and yes, I have gone on record yesterday as stating that PQ was a massive joke; send hate mail here).
Which leads to my question about sociological models in poetry, especially Ron Silliman's "School of Quietude vs. Post-Avant" and Charles Bernstein's "Official Verse Culture." Okay, I don't have a background in sociology. But I do have training in biology and therefore in the Scientific Method (yes, I was taught at the Université Louis Pasteur and then as a Biology student to capitalize "Scientific Method"). Some people have gone on record as denouncing Silliman's model as silly (no pun intended). Sure, it works quite well within the context of American poetry, but shift the focus elsewhere (such as Afghan, Persian or even French poetries) and the model crumbles. Bernstein model, on the other hand, seems to work somewhat better by being broader and more vague. But does that mean we should completely dismiss Ron's model?
Well, Newtonian physics were
in a way made obsolete by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, yet Newtonian physics are still taught in high school and university physics. The Newtonian model is still relevant, although only within a certain context, namely what physicists call the Galilean Referential. The Galilean Referential simply postulates that the experiment conducted takes an amount of time significantly small enough that we can consider the Earth immobile for the experiment. So yeah, Ron's model still works, but only within the context of American poetry.
Okay, I am rambling and talking nonsense.
The Rude Mechanicals are performing Get Your War On, based on the comic by David Rees, tomorrow at DiverseWorks.
The discussion veered toward the question of why Houston poets seem to be so isolated, something that Matt Siegel and I were also exploring (Matt, Michael, you missed each other by 10 minutes)(Matt's answer: "Well, let's change that!" Yes, that's the spirit, Matt). My hypothesis stemmed from the Creative Writing Program's #2 rank in US News & Reports. It made the poets attending the program somewhat complacent, unwilling to answer anyone except their peers there (and the poets at the Iowa's Writers Workshop). Sure, why not? But this doesn't work quite well for the Helios people and the Panhandler Quarterly people (which is really the same scene)(and yes, I have gone on record yesterday as stating that PQ was a massive joke; send hate mail here).
Which leads to my question about sociological models in poetry, especially Ron Silliman's "School of Quietude vs. Post-Avant" and Charles Bernstein's "Official Verse Culture." Okay, I don't have a background in sociology. But I do have training in biology and therefore in the Scientific Method (yes, I was taught at the Université Louis Pasteur and then as a Biology student to capitalize "Scientific Method"). Some people have gone on record as denouncing Silliman's model as silly (no pun intended). Sure, it works quite well within the context of American poetry, but shift the focus elsewhere (such as Afghan, Persian or even French poetries) and the model crumbles. Bernstein model, on the other hand, seems to work somewhat better by being broader and more vague. But does that mean we should completely dismiss Ron's model?
Well, Newtonian physics were
in a way made obsolete by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, yet Newtonian physics are still taught in high school and university physics. The Newtonian model is still relevant, although only within a certain context, namely what physicists call the Galilean Referential. The Galilean Referential simply postulates that the experiment conducted takes an amount of time significantly small enough that we can consider the Earth immobile for the experiment. So yeah, Ron's model still works, but only within the context of American poetry.Okay, I am rambling and talking nonsense.
The Rude Mechanicals are performing Get Your War On, based on the comic by David Rees, tomorrow at DiverseWorks.
Comments
i'm not sure what charles's entire opinion on major-minor is but i know he made us read the book, so he must like it at some level.